Touring with a trailer

[lulubel]

Having chosen a Surly cross check as my "one and forever" bike because of its versatility and - in part - its ability to handle light touring, I'm now beginning to wonder if I should have gone for a long haul trucker.

My idea of light touring (staying in B&Bs) has now been replaced with camping, and I'm not sure that a) the cross check would handle that kind of touring load and b) I'd want to ride it with that kind of touring load considering the high bottom bracket. So, I either need a trailer or a proper touring bike.

What are the pros and cons of touring with a trailer?

 

[ufkacbln]

The only con is storage... where to put it when you go on trains, B&Bs etc.

Some rail companies will not take trailers

I use tow. One is a Radical Cyclone which is basically a holdall on a frame. Take the wheels and towing arm off and you would not know it was a trailer, solving all the issues.

The other option is something like the Carry Freedom which is a basic base with removeable wheels. Not as subtle as the cyclone, but more versatile for tents etc.

 

[Ian Cooper]

Don't worry. Before touring bikes were well-known (perhaps before specialized tourers existed - I don't know), many of us tourists toured on standard run-of-the-mill road bikes. For my first big tour in 1984, I put panniers on an old 1980 Motobecane Super Mirage. I don't even know what class of bike that was. I suspect it was a low-end and relatively heavy general purpose bike. In a year and a half and 10,000 miles, I got one flat tyre and a broken spoke. That's it. These days, with better materials and better roads, I suspect the same money (adjusted for inflation) would get me better wheels and tyres that would get me through the same trip without a single incident.

In my experience, you can tour on anything - I've seen it all, from lightweight racing bikes to heavy department store bikes. Bikes are over-engineered, especially where it concerns carrying capacity. In the 1950s and '60s, the Viet Cong used bikes to transport up to 600lbs of equipment to supply their troops, so I suspect the Cross Check can handle fully loaded expedition style touring.

 

[lulubel]

One is a Radical Cyclone which is basically a holdall on a frame. Take the wheels and towing arm off and you would not know it was a trailer, solving all the issues.

That Radical Cyclone looks smart. What's the capacity like, compared to panniers?

I'm not so concerned about trains, B&Bs, etc, because I'd only be using them if something had gone wrong, and then you just figure something out. I certainly wouldn't be planning to use either. The work I do (totally internet based) gives me the freedom to be away from home for long periods as long as I take work with me, so I'm not dependent on being able to get to a particular location quickly to start my tour. I can just start from home!

Don't worry. Before touring bikes were well-known (perhaps before specialized tourers existed - I don't know), many of us tourists toured on standard run-of-the-mill road bikes.

In the 1950s and '60s, the Viet Cong used bikes to transport up to 600lbs of equipment to supply their troops, so I suspect the Cross Check can handle fully loaded expedition style touring.

I suspect it could, although Surly don't recommend more than 300lb (rider and luggage) even for the LHT, so I think their response would be "tough luck" if I broke the frame doing that! My concern is more whether I could handle the weight and keep the bike balanced, given that the load would be carried quite high up compared to a touring frame.

What kind of weights do people have on their bikes on solo camping tours?

(I do plan to contact Surly and ask what the maximum recommended weight is for the Cross Check, but I want to consider all my options.)

 

[ufkacbln]

That Radical Cyclone looks smart. What's the capacity like, compared to panniers?

Mahoosive!

It is about 100 litres.... and in one place so bulkier objects can be carried.

A pair of rear panniers such as the Ortlieb back rollers are 20 litres each or 40 per pair, so you are talking 5 rear panniers!

 

[Ian Cooper]

What kind of weights do people have on their bikes on solo camping tours?

Last summer, for a weekend of cycling and camping on the atrocious C&O trail here in Maryland, I put a total of probably 250lbs or so on my 1995 Jamis Aragon (an old relatively cheap hybrid) and pulled my daughter on a Trail-a-Bike, so dragging another 80lbs. Although the C&O trail is my idea of cycling hell (being a dirt and loose stone track, liberally sprinkled with deep water-filled potholes), the bike handled the constant shaking, skidding, hammering and juddering without a problem - not even a puncture. Certainly no structural issues with the frame.

Balance shouldn't be much of a problem as long as you have the weight evenly distributed laterally. You tend to get used to the extra weight pretty quickly (on the first day's ride). Opinion is divided on the issue of whether the weight is better low down - some say it is, others say it doesn't really matter. I've even heard some say that higher is better. I think it's better lower, but then again, I spent a year and a half touring with at least 50lbs of gear stashed mostly on top of my rear rack, and the high centre of balance didn't bother me. I must admit, I've never spent much time or effort worrying about the centre of balance. It is where it is, and I deal with it.

And look at it this way - whatever your gear weighs, you probably weigh something like twice as much, and you're very far above the bike's centre of balance, and you're not even properly tied down.

And when Surly say 300lbs max, standard engineering practice (at least when I was working as a structural engineer/draughtsman) was to build in three times the estimated load capacity. So when Surly says 300lbs, the bike might take 900 before it actually breaks. But that doesn't mean Surly will pay a penny or fix it if you break it while carrying 301lbs on it.

I'm pretty sure this bike was probably designed to carry 200lbs max - and I suppose one can only hope that that's all just polystyrene:

But I'm pretty sure this ain't:

 

[bigjim]

I did two tours last year on a race bike with no problems. Two panniers,tent and barbag. I'm 14stone+. No probs.

 

[Ian Cooper]

This is my rig from last year:

That's me - all 14.5 stone worth of me. Then there's all mine and my daughter's clothes, tent, sleeping bags, etc., etc. (likely 50+lbs) sitting on the bike. Then the bike had to pull the 20+lbs of Trail-a-Bike and the 60lbs of my daughter. All told (including the 30lbs of the bike itself), I was probably transporting a grand total of about 360lbs. That's 26 stone, so I don't see why I was smiling, LOL. Maybe it was relief at getting off and having a sit-down.

 

[Crackle]

T
I suspect it could, although Surly don't recommend more than 300lb (rider and luggage) even for the LHT, so I think their response would be "tough luck" if I broke the frame doing that! My concern is more whether I could handle the weight and keep the bike balanced, given that the load would be carried quite high up compared to a touring frame.

Is it though. Rack mounting points will be at a similar height even if your weight is slightly higher and I do think it's only slightly. In fact having a load in panniers will lower your CoG but really I think it will amount to nothing in terms of handling.

What will make a much bigger difference is how you pack and distribute your load. Four panniers distributed evenly side to side and proportionately back to front should be enough for a camping trip and I would think the Cross Check will easily handle the weight of that and yourself, which will in fact weigh less than some riders before they load their bike.

Personally I would not think twice about this but of course it is you who have to be comfortable with it. Best bet is to start by buying some cheap rear panniers and a rack and try it.

Trailers also have their own handling issues if not attached or loaded properly. Dayvo on this forum got overtaken by his and broke a collarbone on tour.

 

[Aushiker]

I have used a BOB Ibex and a Extrawheel Voyager and continue to use an Extrawheel Voyager which will be a critical part of my upcoming Dreaming Tour.

The BOB Ibex was initially for use behind my Giant XTC 2 mountain bike and it worked pretty well in that capacity. My biggest issues was the transfer of weight to far back which made the front too light for the single track. Other than that it worked out well.

With my Dreaming Tour coming up and the need to fly with bike and trailer I will really liked the idea of the Extrawheel Voyager so sold the Bob and replaced it with a Voyager. Early testing touring the Voyager behind my Surly Long Haul Trucker has shown it was a smart move for me.

The advantage for me now is that I have off-road touring capacity with the Extrawheel Voyager behind the Giant XTC 2 and hopefully the lighter trailer will have a positive impact plus I can extend the capacity of the Surly Long Haul Trucker when needed.

Andrew

 

[Bodhbh]

I'm probably at the heavy end of loads with about 12-15kg on the back and maybe another 5kg on the front (plus en route beer and wine) for solo camping.

I'd be more worried about the back wheel then the bottom bracket being high. It has always been poorly built back wheels that've gone on my bikes carrying loads (3 times now). Then again, you might be fine with a factory built back wheel and never have any problems, so..

 

[Pottsy]

Decent wheels and good racks (or maybe trailer if you want to go that way) are all you need to worry about. The bike you've got is absolutely fine.

I have a Surly LHT, a magnificent expedition tourer, but given the choice, I wouldn't want to use it as my only and every day bike. It's heavy and long, the opposite of spritely, whatever that is.

 

[CopperBrompton]

The Voyager is a really cute idea. I imagine you get a few comments along the way?

 

[Ian Cooper]

I have a Surly LHT, a magnificent expedition tourer, but given the choice, I wouldn't want to use it as my only and every day bike. It's heavy and long, the opposite of spritely, whatever that is.

I use an old Jamis Aragon hybrid (the one in the photo I posted above) as my every day bike. It's probably heavier than the LHT, and amazingly, its wheelbase is longer. I considered getting a LHT a year or two ago, but when I saw the specs - especially the short wheelbase (well, I consider it short), I decided to stick with the bike I have.

 

[Yellow7]

I think trailer or not depends on where you're touring, ie.e good roads (Europe) or bad roads (Asia, Africa [or Milton Keynes])

Using a trailer does cause extra stress on the rear wheel bearings, in Mauritania on my tour last year I came across some French tourers using a trailer and the bearing were ruined and started gouging the axle’s inner cup, only option was a new wheel, an easy option in Europe but not so easy in Africa.
Also with a trailer it’s another wheel, so chances of punctures are increased, and small wheel trailers means more revolutions / distance so chances of wearing the trailers bearings, again, not such a problem in Europe.
Flying back from a destination also brings logistical and weight issues. Taking a trailer means more space, so more (unnecessary) stuff is easily taken. My philosophy is if you have to think you ‘might’ need something, then you won’t.
I agree with Ian Cooper, a bike can take a good load. Some say using a trailer keeps the load low, and hence centre-of-gravity low, bearing in mind most of the weight is from the actual rider him/her self so comparatively the load height becomes irrelevant.
Complement that Surly frame with their racks, I used them on my last tour with-out a glitch, ok, maybe expensive [ and slightly heavier than aluminium ] but IMO a worthwhile sacrifice.

Mark wallisonwheels